claude-skills/research/deepread/references/feynman.md

Feynman Comprehension Loop

Use this reference for feynman mode. The objective is to expose and repair understanding gaps through retrieval, not to produce childlike wording for its own sake.

Procedure

1. Set the target — name the idea, mechanism, or chapter-level claim to learn.
2. Read for structure — identify the central claim, key terms, mechanism, and evidence.
3. Close the source — do not look at the text or analysis notes.
4. Explain from memory — use plain language and preserve causal or logical links.
5. Mark uncertainty — tag every vague phrase, skipped step, undefined term, or appeal to jargon.
6. Locate the first broken link — find the earliest point where the explanation stops being justified.
7. Return narrowly — reread only the material needed to repair that gap.
8. Rewrite the explanation — replace jargon with a mechanism, concrete example, or boundary condition.
9. Test transfer — apply the idea to a new case and predict what should happen.
10. Test contrast — explain a case where the idea should not apply.
11. Schedule retrieval — create short recall prompts for later review.

Gap Types

• Definition gap — a term cannot be explained without repeating itself.
• Mechanism gap — steps are listed but causality or logic is missing.
• Evidence gap — the claim is remembered but its support is not.
• Boundary gap — the learner cannot say when the claim fails.
• Transfer gap — the learner repeats the source but cannot use the idea elsewhere.

Output Template

## Learning target
[One precise concept or claim]

## Closed-book explanation
[Plain-language explanation reconstructed from memory]

## Detected gaps
- [Gap type]: [specific missing link]

## Corrected explanation
[Repaired explanation with the missing mechanism or evidence]

## Transfer test
[New scenario and predicted outcome]

## Boundary test
[Scenario where the idea should not apply]

## Recall prompts
1. [Question that retrieves the central mechanism]
2. [Question that retrieves evidence]
3. [Question that retrieves a limitation]

Quality Rules

• Simplicity must not delete an essential condition.
• An analogy must identify where the analogy breaks.
• Reopening the source before attempting retrieval invalidates the gap test.
• Recognition (this looks familiar) is not recall (I can reconstruct it).
• Review questions should retrieve relationships and mechanisms, not isolated vocabulary.

Sources

1. Adler, M. J. & Van Doren, C. — How to Read a Book (rev. ed., 1972) — the analytical-reading stages this workflow's deep mode follows.
2. Gleick, J. — Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman (1992) — primary biographical account of Feynman's learn-by-teaching notebook practice.
3. Farnam Street — "The Feynman Technique: The Best Way to Learn Anything" (fs.blog/feynman-technique) — the canonical four-step formulation used here.
4. Karpicke, J. D. & Roediger, H. L. — "The Critical Importance of Retrieval for Learning", Science 319 (2008) — evidence that recall attempts, not re-reading, drive retention.
5. Dunlosky, J. et al. — "Improving Students' Learning With Effective Learning Techniques", Psychological Science in the Public Interest 14 (2013) — rates practice testing and self-explanation as highest-utility techniques, re-reading as low-utility.
6. Chi, M. T. H. et al. — "Self-Explanations: How Students Study and Use Examples", Cognitive Science 13 (1989) — the self-explanation effect behind the teach-back step.